diff --git a/domains/internet-finance/Polymarket vindicated prediction markets over polling in 2024 US election.md b/domains/internet-finance/Polymarket vindicated prediction markets over polling in 2024 US election.md
index 5ea7094c..25df660a 100644
--- a/domains/internet-finance/Polymarket vindicated prediction markets over polling in 2024 US election.md	
+++ b/domains/internet-finance/Polymarket vindicated prediction markets over polling in 2024 US election.md	
@@ -48,6 +48,12 @@ The very success of prediction markets in the 2024 election triggered the state
 
 ---
 
+### Additional Evidence (extend)
+*Source: [[2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition]] | Added: 2026-03-22*
+
+The Atanasov/Mellers framework suggests this vindication may be domain-specific. Prediction markets outperformed polls in 2024 election, but GJP research shows algorithm-weighted polls can match market accuracy for geopolitical events with public information. The election result doesn't distinguish whether markets won through better calibration-selection (Mechanism A, replicable by polls) or through information-acquisition advantages (Mechanism B, not replicable). If markets succeeded primarily through Mechanism A, sophisticated poll aggregation could have matched them.
+
+
 Relevant Notes:
 - [[futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders]] — theoretical property validated by Polymarket's performance
 - [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] — shows mechanism robustness even at small scale
diff --git a/inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.json b/inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.json
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..9fc081b5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.json
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+{
+  "rejected_claims": [
+    {
+      "filename": "prediction-market-epistemic-mechanisms-separate-into-calibration-selection-and-information-acquisition.md",
+      "issues": [
+        "missing_attribution_extractor"
+      ]
+    }
+  ],
+  "validation_stats": {
+    "total": 1,
+    "kept": 0,
+    "fixed": 2,
+    "rejected": 1,
+    "fixes_applied": [
+      "prediction-market-epistemic-mechanisms-separate-into-calibration-selection-and-information-acquisition.md:set_created:2026-03-22",
+      "prediction-market-epistemic-mechanisms-separate-into-calibration-selection-and-information-acquisition.md:stripped_wiki_link:speculative markets aggregate information more accurately th"
+    ],
+    "rejections": [
+      "prediction-market-epistemic-mechanisms-separate-into-calibration-selection-and-information-acquisition.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
+    ]
+  },
+  "model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
+  "date": "2026-03-22"
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.md b/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.md
index f2b43a7a..19020aee 100644
--- a/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.md
+++ b/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-atanasov-mellers-calibration-selection-vs-information-acquisition.md
@@ -7,9 +7,13 @@ date: 2026-03-22
 domain: internet-finance
 secondary_domains: [ai-alignment, collective-intelligence]
 format: article
-status: unprocessed
+status: enrichment
 priority: high
 tags: [prediction-markets, superforecasters, epistemic-mechanism, skin-in-the-game, belief-1, disconfirmation, academic, mechanism-design]
+processed_by: rio
+processed_date: 2026-03-22
+enrichments_applied: ["Polymarket vindicated prediction markets over polling in 2024 US election.md"]
+extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
 ---
 
 ## Content
@@ -77,3 +81,12 @@ Financial markets up-weight skilled participants via earnings. Calibration algor
 PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[speculative markets aggregate information more accurately than expert consensus or voting systems]]
 WHY ARCHIVED: Resolves the Session 8 challenge to Belief #1; establishes the two-mechanism distinction that reframes multiple existing claims about futarchy's epistemic properties
 EXTRACTION HINT: The claim to extract is the two-mechanism distinction, not just a summary of the academic findings. Focus on Mechanism A (calibration-selection, replicable by polls) vs. Mechanism B (information-acquisition, not replicable). The finding is architecturally important — it should affect multiple existing claims as enrichments.
+
+
+## Key Facts
+- GJP beat all IARPA ACE research teams by 35-72% (Brier score)
+- GJP beat intelligence community's internal prediction market by 25-30%
+- Top superforecaster Year 2 Brier score: 0.14 vs. random guessing 0.53
+- Year-to-year top forecaster correlation: 0.65
+- GJP reportedly outperformed futures markets by 66% at Fed policy inflection points (Financial Times, July 2024)
+- Kalshi real-money markets beat Bloomberg consensus for headline CPI and matched realized fed funds rate on FOMC day (Fed FEDS paper, Diercks/Katz/Wright, 2026)